Posted
by
Unknown Lamer
on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @08:06AM
from the we-control-the-horizontal dept.

New submitter zaphod777 writes with an update on Samsung's release of info on pre-iPhone designs. It seems the additional information released relating to the F700 was actually rejected from the trial, and the judge isn't too happy: "Samsung has already appealed the rulings denying the evidence, but that didn't stop the company's lawyers from trying again today after Apple briefly showed the F700 on a slide during its opening statements. Claiming that Apple had 'opened the door' to discussion of the F700, Samsung asked the court to reconsider. That didn't go so well with Judge Koh, who noted that 'Samsung has filed like 10 motions for reconsideration,' and asked Samsung lead attorney John Quinn to sit back down. At one point in the exchange Quinn told Koh that he was 'begging the court,' and desperately asked 'what's the point in having a trial?' — but Koh simply wasn't buying it. 'Don't make me sanction you,' she said. 'Please.'"

WTF? The summary should have made it more clear that these are pre-iPhone *Samsung* designs, showing pretty clearly that they were considering very iPhone-like designs before the iPhone had even released. It's the cornerstone of Samsung's case that Apple didn't invent the idea of a rectangular phone with a touchscreen and that they had been developing the same design idea at the time.

Not sure how a judge can prohibit someone from releasing their own designs. But, then, gag orders have a long history of infringing on areas that would clearly otherwise be considered free speech, and judges have a long history of abusing them.

Not sure how a judge can prohibit someone from releasing their own designs. But, then, gag orders have a long history of infringing on areas that would clearly otherwise be considered free speech, and judges have a long history of abusing them.

The judge is known to be a pro-Apple shill. She's made illogical rulings favorable to Apple before.

In short, Samsung is in trouble if they expect a fair trial (given the history, they probably expect the trial to be anything but fair).

How do you think Apple's marketing department will respond? Marketing is far and away Apple's strongest department, so it'll simply be spun as Samsung being sore losers. I'm not sure why the judge would necessarily care either, some just simply don't. Look at The Pirate Bay trial for example, the judge was part of a music industry lobby group, was exposed as such, but simply didn't give a shit and carried on.

Unless it stops her getting her paycheck, which it wont, then she has no reason to care or change course.

Then they need to put their PR machine on it. Smear the judge in the media, smear the whole damn thing. make it exceedingly embarrassing for the judge to do anything but be fair.

A dirty bought off judge needs to have their character attacked in the public eye, They deserve nothing but contempt.

Ah, that's it. The judge has been bought off. There's no point in a having a trial, the result is forgone.

Why does this stuff get modded as insightful on slashdot? Have we all become a bunch of in-grained idiots cheering for our favourites, without paying even lip service to the facts? How about, rather than pre-judging everything, and accusing judges of being crooked, we wait a little while and examine the facts that are revealed? I know its a lot to ask, but aren't we supposed to be geeks? Aren't facts and logic what we deal with?

There is a misconception here that this is a trail before the court of public opinion. This is not the case. This is a trial before the law. It doesn't matter what we believe is fair and just, frequently the law isn't to all parties, it matters what can be proven in law. Of course if you're backing Samsung, because Apple is evil, none of this matters. They are guilty and should just cease trading and give all of their IP to Google for the benefit of mankind.

Call me old fashioned but I'd like to hear the evidence before making a judgement.

Because Apple already submitted images into evidence dating back to 2003 for the iPad and from 2005 for the iPhone. The images linked above are from 2006, making them irrelevant 'noise'. Unless Samsung can submit certified designs pre-dating those from Apple, then they are just attempting to push meaningless evidence at the jury in hopes that it will confuse, which is probably why the judge didn't allow these images.

If someone here can show a link to some sort of evidence where Samsung has submitted direct

Sometimes Samsung just ask a design company to design, program and build a phone to their specification. In 2005, I was working for a semiconductor chipset vendor, and one of these design companies was building a phone for Samsung based on our platform. Samsung basically were hands-off the whole time. In fact, they asked 2 competing design houses to build exactly the same spec (look and feel, not innards) phone. Whichever one made them happy first, they ran with. I mean literally - Samsung did *nothing*.

That mockup is based on something SONY told them. So it sure sounds like someone at sony had this idea as well.

Well, no. Jony Ive asked a fellow designer "what would the iPhone look like if Sony designed it"? There was no input from Sony on the design. The result was a combination of the iPhone design, as it existed at that time, plus what the designer believed would be typical for a Sony design.

Because Apple already submitted images into evidence dating back to 2003 for the iPad and from 2005 for the iPhone. The images linked above are from 2006, making them irrelevant 'noise'.

According to the link from TFA, the only reason the judge is not allowing Samsung's image from 2006 is because it was submitted too late in the discovery process. It has nothing to do with any earlier images for the iPhone/iPad. Sucks for Samsung, but that's the way the law works. At any rate, is the trial over Samsung's designs looking too much like early iPhone/iPad prototypes, which IIRC, differ significantly from the final product? Earlier images only count if they incorporate the same features that are being contested now.

Everyone seems to forget that Samsung was machining these phones for Apple, so of course they knew exactly what they looked like and operated long before they hit the public.

So Samsung, not Foxconn, "machines" the phones for Apple? Samsung supplies some of the ICs. I doubt that Apple would give them any more information than absolutely necessary on what the phone was going to look like.

Yes, I agree completely on the first part of your argument, stating that we should wait for actual facts.

However, you do have a statement that I do not completely agree with.

It doesn't matter what we believe is fair and just, frequently the law isn't to all parties, it matters what can be proven in law.

Maybe I am interpreting this incorrectly, but that sounds like you are a person that makes their judgements completely on the letter of the law and does not consider the spirit of the law. I do not completely agree with that. Most times, the letter of the law and the spirit of the law can work together in a trial. However, laws cannot b

None of this is invention...this is all about style. And style should NOT be patentable. Especially when it is evolutionary and tied to use design. By which I mean the use of a tool determines it's design.

A shovel, regardless of design will likely have a handle, and a broad flat shape attached to the end. Whether it is slightly tapered to a spade, extra wide for snow, or narrow and elongated for trench digging are merely evolutions of an inherent use design.

This design was created by Apple by an Apple designer aiming at what an iPhone would look like if Sony made it. It was excluded from evidence because it isn't relevant to the case, and it was designed by Apple. This is not a Samsung design, it is an Apple design created by Apple designer Shin Nishibori. Apple has already shown court documents with prototypes from 2005, predating any F700 designs from Samsung by a year.

This design was created by Nishibori as a personal project when he was speaking with Jonat

Samsung is also not allowed to bring up a reference that Shin Nishibori, an Apple design inventor, made regarding Sony's influence on the iPhone. In a deposition, Nishibori referred to a conversation he had with Apple's design chief, Jonathan Ive, in which Ive reportedly asked Nishibori what a Sony-made iPhone would look like.

You're both confused because there are two separate issues here (notice the word "also" in the quote you pasted)

Issue 1) Samsung wants to show it had designs of iPhone-like phones predating the iPhone. In particular the designs predating the F700, which is a Samsung Phone
Issue 2) Samsung wants to show that Apple looked toward others, i.e. Sony for inspiration on the iPhone. This would be what you quoted.

Samsung wasn't allowed to do this in trial, so they sent out a bunch of slides (linked here [allthingsd.com]) to the press which do the same, and the Judge is mad at that.

Unfortunately Samsung they failed to convince the judge that their evidence was relevant, which is why it wasn't allowed. The article and image, linked in the summary are from 2006. Apple had already submitted design prototype images into evidence for the iPhone dating back to 2005, and iPad prototypes dating back to 2003.

Remember that Samsung would have already been involved in producing iPhone components by 2006 since the iPhone was released in June of 2007. They would have engaged Samsung long before the

Unfortunately Samsung they failed to convince the judge that their evidence was relevant, which is why it wasn't allowed.

No, they weren't allowed because they were late in producing the evidence. Apple then proceeded to talk about the F700m which Samsung is now arguing is Apple opening the door for the evidence to be allowed.

hey would have engaged Samsung long before the release date (obviously in order to have the phones for sale in 2007), meaning sometime predaiting the 2006 timeframe. That also happens to correspond to the timeframes that Samsung's designs morphed from their older pre-iPhone designs, to designs that were decidedly very similar to the iPhone design.

Then it's up to Apple to prove such, i.e. they gave Samsung iPhone designs in the same period Samsung sketched its own phone designs. That seems like something much more serious than simple trade dress violation, and I don't think Apple alleging such a thing.

When you have a company producing the handsets you are going to sell

Samsung doesn't produce iPhones, they produced iPhone components. Most of Apple's claims against Samsung relate to trade dress infringement and trade dress dilution. I don't see why a component supplier would have any prior knowledge of how the final product will look. The most they could know is how big the screen is (if they supplied the screen, I don't know).

products suddenly take change in design direction and begin to look very similar to the designs it is currently manufacturing

Yes, this is Apple's stance, but what Samsung is trying to show is that they didn't suddenly change course and that it was a logical design progression that started before the iPhone was ever shown to the public.

You're conflating issues. I believe you're thinking of this [allthingsd.com] phone, but what samsung wants the Jury to see is this [allthingsd.com], and this [allthingsd.com], which are Samsung designs for a clearly iPhone-like phone, predating the iPhone.

But, the iPhone design images are from 2005, a year before the Samsung sketches. Samsung's design could have been created independently, but it could have also been based on information leaked by hardware suppliers in Asia. Who knows.

So in the face of the above you seem to be claiming that Samsung was so crap scared of the 'awesome innovation' of the unreleased iPhone that they used their spy network to get the details so they can design one that was similar?

Either that or design convergence around common technology was at work. So, either spy network or "design a phone with a massive touch screen" leads to similar designs. I prefer spy network. It leads to Bond women or something.

Seriously, we're talking about one button vs a small collection of buttons. That's really the sole difference.

I mean, my HTC 6700 was essentially the same form factor as an iPhone. Granted thicker cause it's older, and it had an antenna nub. But the main difference is there was a small conglomeration of like 5 buttons vs the one button.

And that is the difference...sorry, that is NOT !@#$% invention. This case should be dismissed with extreme prejudice and Apple should be fined $1 billion for filing the cas

But, the iPhone design images are from 2005, a year before the Samsung sketches.

Shin Nishibori has testified that his Sony design changed the course of the iPhone project - the existing design was scraped and the Sony design was adopted instead. Apple is insisting that Nishibori is wrong, and that the existing design wasn't influenced by the Sony design.

Samsung's design could have been created independently, but it could have also been based on information leaked by hardware suppliers in Asia. Who knows.

Samsung might have copied, Apple might have copied, but doesn't "innocent until proven guilty" still apply? If Apple believes that its designs were leaked and copied (which it is not arguing, and there is no reason to suspect that, in 2

One of these phones (the bottom-right one) became the Samsung F700 - a product Apple once included as an infringing product, but later withdrew once it learned Samsung created it and brought it to market before the iPhone

It seems the F700 was a Samsung design. Is the article incorrect in this claim?

Apple had already established it's iPhone design and has images of such from 2005. This unfulfilled prototype was from 2006.

From the article again:

This is what Samsung was considering putting to market in the summer of 2006, six months before the unveiling of the iPhone.

You are confusing what was disallowed by the judge and the images that Samsung actually leaked. The information released by Samsung that pissed off the judge was showing a prototype that Apple created.

The F700 is being discussed because Apple was allowed to argue that the F700 was a copy of the iPhone design. Samsung said they intended to release information which would 'prove they did not copy the iPhone

In response, the South Korean manufacturer has decided to release its evidence to the media: two slides showing Samsung phone designs and an excerpt from the deposition of former Apple designer Shin Nishibori, who said previously that he would not testify in court.

It should not matter which was first. The fact that Samsung had this design before they had seen the iPhone design means that they clearly came up with it independently. Patents are broken. They currently serve to do the exact opposite of what they were intended for.

Apple had already established it's iPhone design and has images of such from 2005. This unfulfilled prototype was from 2006.

The prototypes from Samsung could still be relevant if Apples design where not released by that time. In that case Samsungs designs could show that two parties where having the same ideas independently.

The judge ought to be charge-sheeted and sentenced for prejudicial misconduct. Sadly, it appears she has already decided in favour of Apple. So looks like this is headed for the Appeals court, all over again.

this is a: the same judge that filed the injunction against samsung and b: says things need to be public. Samsung releasing one of it's own designs? Questionable that there can be any judicial influence on the topic.

Even more unsure how this evidence can be dismissed by a judge. It's important.

If it is important, then please explain why Samsung produced it after the deadline. There are three logical explanations: 1. This evidence was good evidence, but Samsung's lawyers are morons who didn't submit that evidence until it was too late. 2. This was evidence that Apple could have refuted if they did a careful search, so Samsung's lawyers tried to get the evidence in as late as possible so that Apple wouldn't have time to find out what's wrong with it. 3. This is evidence that Samsung always knew was rubbish, so they intentionally submitted it after the deadline, hoping that people would think that Samsung is treated unfairly when it is refused, and again not giving Apple a chance to refute it.

Although I agree that Samsung might have been considering iphone like designes before the iphone came out, one has to consider if Samsung's designs were based on what they saw when Apple came to them for manufacturing as opposed to when it was released.

Samsung would have known the design of the iphone FAR before the release date due to the fact that they had to manufacture it.

WTF? The summary should have made it more clear that these are pre-iPhone *Samsung* designs, showing pretty clearly that they were considering very iPhone-like designs before the iPhone had even released. It's the cornerstone of Samsung's case that Apple didn't invent the idea of a rectangular phone with a touchscreen and that they had been developing the same design idea at the time.

Not sure how a judge can prohibit someone from releasing their own designs.

Because that shows the "obviousness" of certain design elements. Just compare pictures of a (switched-off) HP TouchPad and an Apple iPad, they are freakishly similar up to the one button at the bottom center (though it's shaped differently).

LUCKILY these designs are all over the net, so everyone knows that the general appearance is not a Revelation Given To Humanity by Apple.

Exactly what I mean by abuse. I don't recall an asterisk after the First Amendment leading to:

* Unless some random judge says you don't have the right to free speech.

There was a particularly egregious case [cbsnews.com] in Kentucky recently, where a teenage girl was almost charged with contempt (and probably would have been, if not for the press attention), for daring to name her rapists in public.

Exactly what I mean by abuse. I don't recall an asterisk after the First Amendment leading to:

* Unless some random judge says you don't have the right to free speech.

WTF are you talking about? To suggest that a gag order uniformly constitues "abuse" reveals that you have an anti-understanding of due process and the USA legal system. You are speaking nonsense.

As for your "egregious" cite, let me assure you that my work with more than one ACTUAL judge at the federal and state levels shows that they are so far above influence by the press, to suggest otherwise will get even the press laughing at you. In the case you mention, the girl clearly violated a Court Order and also well-established law. The judge showed the girl mercy by not charging her with contempt, likely because he didn't want to make her life any more miserable than it already was.

An order barring a victim from revealing the names of her assailants is, I think, clearly unconstitutional, even when the assailants are juveniles. Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court (1977) expressly rejected the notion that courts or legislatures may bar the publication of the names of juvenile offenders; that case involved a newspaper's publishing the name of the juvenile offender, which it learned from a court hearing, but the rationale applies at least as strongly to a person's publishing a name that she learned from the attack itself. Likewise, even when it comes to grand jury proceedings - probably the most historically secret part of the criminal justice system - Butterworth v. Smith (1990) held that, while a grand jury witness could be barred from revealing what he learned as part of the grand jury proceedings, the witness could not be generally barred from revealing information that he had learned on his own (even if that was the subject of his testimony).

Oh, and her name is out...the victim should never suffer worse judments than the criminal. That is injustice. And legal be damned, legal is evil. Legal is what allowed slavery, legal is what allowed abuse of immigrants, morality is what counts.

You have to have an established starting position in order to flip-flop on it. I am not aware of any statements made by John Roberts prior to his ruling that indicated a different stance than the one issued in his ruling.

That's pretty disingenuous given that my Palm Treo had touch and no stylus in 2004. It was Windows Mobile 6.0, then upgraded to 6.5. Apple's advantage is that they had no legacy products or expectations to maintain so they could start over with a clean interface. When other manufacturers saw how clean it was they realized they had to put away their legacy products and move forward and we're all the better for it.

Additionaly, my Palm Treo had rounded corners! I used the screen lock so it didn't make calls.

IIRC, the evidence was rejected because it was submitted after the deadline has passed. That may sound petty, but the other side in this case should have a chance to examine the evidence and prepare a response. That's how these things work, and should work.

for showing what a mockery the courts make of the law so they can arrive at their predetermined ruling.

If evidence that supports the defense is excluded then I have to agree with the attorney for Samsung as to what point is there for a trial?

If Samsung can spring surprise evidence on the other side on the eve of trial, having withheld it during months and months of required disclosure and discovery, then what point is there for due process? The federal courts don't actually work the way you see in Boston Legal.

I don't know enough about the situation, but why wasn't it raised earlier? I understand they said deadline was passed, but when was apple's complaint raised prior to samsung introducing this evidence? Would they know that prior to apple raising a complaint, for example?

If Samsung can spring surprise evidence on the other side on the eve of trial, having withheld it during months and months of required disclosure and discovery, then what point is there for due process?

If Samsung is not allowed to introduce relevant evidence, then what is the point of this trial? The courts judgement is going to be based on a partial view of the available evidence. If Samsung lose, they will instantly appeal and submit the relevant evidence that they weren't allowed to introduce the first time. Seems like a waste of time and money to allow this to happen.

If Samsung can spring surprise evidence on the other side on the eve of trial, having withheld it during months and months of required disclosure and discovery, then what point is there for due process?

If Samsung is not allowed to introduce relevant evidence, then what is the point of this trial?

They had months to introduce it. There was a very clear date, set well in advance, at which point all evidence had to have been introduced or it would be excluded. Why should Samsung get a pass on the rules?

The courts judgement is going to be based on a partial view of the available evidence. If Samsung lose, they will instantly appeal and submit the relevant evidence that they weren't allowed to introduce the first time. Seems like a waste of time and money to allow this to happen.

There's nothing that says that the appeals court will let them introduce it either. They had months to do so and kept it secret, hoping to spring it out right before trial. That's not allowed.

Typical Apple fanboy, the one who kept evidence hidden for months was Apple in this case, making it impossible for Samsung to get this evidence any earlier. As can be read clearly in Samsungs appeal. Mind you, facts never get in the way of an Apple fanboy.

Last I checked, the F700 was a Samsung phone. You're claiming that Apple hid Samsung's own product history from them, making it impossible for Samsung to get it any earlier. Why exactly should we find you credible about anything?

Last I checked, the F700 was a Samsung phone. You're claiming that Apple hid Samsung's own product history from them, making it impossible for Samsung to get it any earlier.

Perhaps Apple did not reveal until they were in court that they were going to attempt to use the F700 as evidence that Samsung copied the iPhone? And now Samsung is not allowed to refute that claim by showing that the F700 designs predate the iPhone.

Apple: "Your F700 copied the design features of our phone after it was released in 2007"
Samsung: "No, here are our internal design documents for the F700 phone from before 2007"
Judge: "Sorry, you can't refute Apple's claim with new evidence"

Perhaps Apple did not reveal until they were in court that they were going to attempt to use the F700 as evidence that Samsung copied the iPhone?

That was in their list of evidence before the deadline. That's why it's allowed in. Samsung had to show it's evidence too, but they held it in secret, so they don't get to introduce it now.

How can you refute a claim if you aren't allowed to introduce evidence in support of your refutation?

You are, but you don't get a limitless amount of time to introduce it. I think a lot of people get misled by courtroom dramas that include Surprise Witnesses introduced for the first time at trial. Unless Samsung has a good reason why they couldn't have introduced this earlier - and considering it's their own phone and pr

Not that I care* since the full face touch screen phone is clearlhy obvious, but Apple must be really tricky if they can keep evidence of Samsung's own designs from Samsung.

* Heck I wrote the code for a "phone" running on an iPAQ (oh look a non-apple i* name) PDA in 2001 or so. Not a useful thing, a prototype that used SIP/RTP for making actual calls over wifi (the device itself actually did the RTP part with yet another layer hiding the SIP stuff since the phone portion was a minor part of the overall setu

In the US, it is up to the jury to decide who is right. Not the judge.

I think it would help for you to understand the law better. In jury trials, judges determine issues of law and juries determine issues of fact. Whether or not evidence should be barred because Samsung failed to produce it (their own design they had for years) during a months-long discovery period is an issue of law determined soley by the judge.

If you had been following the case, Samsung made an appeal to have this evidence added past deadline. This was their designs which they could have submitted earlier. The judge said no. Samsung filed appeals. Now they are asking again to submit it even though they've been told repeatedly no. If you were the judge, you'd be pissed too.

I don't really care that much how the trial pans out... But I do care about the fact that it seems like this trial is hurting my choices as a consumer. I like choice. From what I can see Apple is trying reeeeally hard to show that they should own a bunch of really nice UI ideas. Or that a touchscreen filling most of the user facing side of the phone is their idea? Frankly, the whole thing seems ridiculous.

Recently I've been looking at buying an IP67-grade Android phone. AFAIK Apple has no plans to make the iPhone waterproof and dustproof. So if Apple has it's way either I buy a UI-crippled phone, or an iPhone which doesn't fit my requirements?

Legislation should exist to benefit society, not to maximize profits for a select few corporate entities.

With patent litigation, the direct answer is that we almost never do, and the system isn't really intended to provide an immediate benefit: it's explicitly a temporary monopoly granted to an inventor, and monopolies (even temporary) generally raise prices and reduce options.

The theoretical long-term justification is that a patent system incentivizes both innovation and public disclosure of innovations (vs. keeping them as trade secrets), thereby making us all better off in general, with better, cheaper, technology and more options if you view it over a longer timeframe than the timeframe of any one patent.

If an idea is MUCH easier to get out to market than it is to come up with, then it is a good candidate for a patent. The same applies if coming up with an idea requires some huge investment in capital.

If not, patents get in the way.

Getting a phone out to market seems to cost about the same as designing it - we're not talking about orders of magnitude in cost. So, patents tend to get in the way.

Legislation should exist to benefit society, not to maximize profits for a select few corporate entities.

The problem here is not the legislation so much as the regulation. Different parts of the American economy need different patent policies and quite a bit of judgement needs to be applied to achieve that. That is we need an expensive, well staffed powerful patent office with strong congressional support.

Consumers benefit in the short run when anyone can copy anyone else. That triggers price wars, which make things cheap.

Consumers benefit in the long run when companies that make big bets are able to benefit from them. Look at tablets before Apple: decades of stagnation. Look at "smartphones" before Apple: a decade of what we'd now call "feature phones". Apple made enormous bets on these devices and all the pundits predicted they'd flop. If they had, Apple might not have survived as a company. If another company can simply make their phone or tablet look and act like Apple's, exactly how will companies like Apple believe it is in their best interest to take huge gambles for consumer benefits?

Even if Apple continues on its name brand, what about other innovative companies? Samsung is HUGE, and if a company like that can use its integrated manufacturing, marketing, etc, against any innovator -- sucking the profit out of innovation -- other markets will stagnate as tablets and phones did prior to Apple.

So, while the patent system is broken and patents things it should not, the anyone-can-copy market doesn't actually lead to innovation. (If it did lead to innovation, Linux would surely be the desktop of choice today, right?)

I don't understand. The trial isn't about whether Samsung copied Apple. It's not about the morals or ethics of copying. It's about whether Samsung violated Apple's utility and design patents. While the focus on copying is relevant to the design patents, even then, this shouldn't be about moral questions. If Samsung decided to copy Apple, it doesn't matter. IANAL but I saw this with the iPad design patent trial in Germany too and I couldn't understand. The trial should be about the patent. And the iPad design patent shows a fat tablet that looks nothing like any iPad. So I never understood how Samsung could have been found to have violated that patent. Similarly, for Apple's utility patents, the software patents, the trial should be focused on the validity and violation of the patents, namely prior art and the 'obviousness' and patentability of the patents, and whether Samsung actually infringes on them.

If it turns out that Samsung has to pay a few million even a few hundred million to Apple to Apple for the iPhone design patent violated by the Galaxy S, it won't affect things much. While I still feel that would be a case of the legal system going overboard, Samsung clearly did copy many aspects of the iPhone design. But as the Galaxy S 2 and S 3 look nothing like any iPhone, it shouldn't affect any current products. Samsung can afford to pay that much and Apple has more money than it knows what to do with. Whereas if Apple win on one of the software patents that would be a terrifying outcome that would be followed by preliminary injunctions blocking virtually all Android phones in the U.S. This isn't a moral crusade. If Samsung copied Apple and Apple still lose, well boohoo, it wouldn't make the list of the top one million horrible things that happened in the world that day.

It's not about being morally right or wrong. Not just the coverage, but so much of the testimony and evidence and court proceedings seem to focus on that. And this judge is an ignorant nutcase, who ordered a preliminary injunction before a trial to ban the Galaxy Nexus from the United Status. Yes, she decided that having a common search for local and web items is a valid patent, is clearly violated, and having that violated harms Apple's business much more than having the GN banned would harm consumers. I would love to see Apple get that reasoning past Posner. At least make them win in a goddam trial, does she even understand she will be fundamentally undermining the market dynamics of the fastest growing, emerging area of technology in the world and handing the market to Apple on a platter with bans like those, and if that is really justified by a dubious patent?

Maybe that should judge should learn how court cases work before she presides over this case. If they say XXXXX cannot be administered as evidence and then you show it anyway, you instantly land somewhere between a mistrial and losing the case. I can think of several criminal cases that were instantly done and over with because the prosecution mentioned something about the defendant that was specifically not allowed as evidence. Like if someone was on trial for being a serial killer and they deemed it no

In civil trials, you have a pre-trial period called discovery. In big, complex trials like these, discovery lasts for many months. During the discovery process, each side is entitled to ask for, and required to provide, evidence from the other side. In addition to this, each side is required to provide to the opposing counsel all of the evidence they might bring up at trial. This is intended to allow both sides plenty of time to investigate the opposing evidence and prepare their responses.

Samsung's attorneys failed to produce the evidence about the design of the F700 during the discovery period. This is in spite of it being around for several years before the lawsuit was even filed by Apple. By holding it back until just before the trial, Apple's counsel didn't get the time to investigate the evidence and prepare their responses. Because we have an adversarial legal system, one in which two parties fighting over the truth before an independent jury, it's important that the rules guarantee both parties a fair fight.

Judge Koh decided that holding back that evidence until after discovery broke the rules required for a fair fight, especially considering that 1) Samsung had the evidence available for years, and 2) if the evidence is actually the smoking gun that they claim, it should have been presented during discovery to give Apple the right to examine it and prepare a response. I think this was a reasonable decision by the judge. To be fair, consider how you would have reacted if the roles had been reversed and Apple had tried to introduce such important evidence so late.

All that said, and knowing how some lawyers can be, I suspect the evidence is being overblown by the Samsung attorney because he wants a path to appeal. Improperly denied evidence could give rise to an entire retrial. But I suspect:

someone on Samsung's legal team screwed up and didn't include the evidence in discovery

the Samsung attorneys realized the screw up and are now trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear

the evidence is actually quite weak (See this excellent takedown [theverge.com] of how the F700 is not much like the iPhone at all.)

by releasing the evidence in a press release, the attorney is trying to manipulate the judge, not get a fair outcome.

Combined with the evidence destruction [bloomberg.com] by Samsung, they've really been screwing this one up.

Yes, but my understanding is Apple discussed it during the case. this opens it up regardless of the pretrial issues. And releasing the information outside the court should have no effect on the case. The jury should not be looking at press releases on these companies anyways.

What are you talking about? North Korea is China-heavy. South Korea is one of the capitalistic giants of the world. It is proof that capitalism encourages democracy (South Korea was a military dictatorship that evolved into a democracy as its middle class expanded as a result of its capitalistic economy--partially imposed by the U.S. on the government as a condition of defense against North Korean aggression).